Pathfinder 1E The dex-based fighter, how does he fare?

[Mad Hamish]

Magus is actually another class I'm strongly considering. However, reading over these and the paizo boards the last couple weeks, I've gotten the impression that a fighter can perform much better than a magus in dealing raw damage, so figured that might be something to explore.

It's probably fair to say that the fighter is the king of dishing out consistent damage in Pathfinder of the melee classes (Paladin's might challenge while smiting, Ranger's might do a touch more against a favored enemy) but a fighter really needs to be either 2 weapon (including shield as a possible weapon), 2 handed weapon or archer to really pump their damage up.

The impression I've gotten (and I haven't seen a Magus in play) is that they can do good burst damage but they don't have the ability to do the damage for as long as a fighter does.

How would Dervish Dance work with a fighter? Hrm. I suppose he would still have trouble with armor and his dex not meshing well, wouldn't he? Grrr.

Normally Full Plate and max dex mod gives you +10 to AC, a breastplate and max dex mod for it gives you +9 to AC (needing 16 or 17 dex to hit that which if you're going for a dex based combatant you probably will have at 1st level)
as a fighter they'll eventually go up to +14/+13 for the plate/breastplate but you'll probably be bumping dex up.
The heavy armor gives better flat footed defense, the light and more dex gives better touch defence...

The bigger issue is that a dex based fighter won't get * 1.5 damage from str or power attack or the additional attacks with 2 weapons to make up for it.

The airship concept definitely has me wanting to go with lighter armor. On the other hand, my powergamer nature doesn't want to give up a lot of effectiveness for fluff.

Hrm. Perhaps in this case the magus wins out just because it's a better compromise between the two...

Lighter armour for a fighter isn't a big issue, and isn't really an issue at all for a dex based fighter. The issue is power attack not boosting damage as effectively (and without the additional attacks of a 2 weapon fighter).

It's an offense problem rather than a defense problem.
The Magus gives you offense in other ways so it will probably be more effective as a dex based combatant (and also has the chance to learn feater fall)...

 

[Ramaster]

The pointbuy (or lack thereof) you will be using is also a determining factor. If you rolled stats, let us know if you want advice on how to allocate them

Lets say you play with pointbuy 20 and pick Elf as a race. Your stats could look something like this:

STR 14 (5). For five points, you get +3 net damage with 2-handed and can get power attack
DEX 17 (13). The elf pumps this to 19. It will by 20 by level 4.
CON 14 (5). Again, the elf reduces this to 12, but in my experience, this is more than enough
WIS 10 (0). Nothing to see here, move along
INT 11 (1) The elf takes this to 13, giving you the chance to take combat maneuver feats. If you are sure you won't pick them, then drop it as low a 7 and raise DEX or WIS.
CHA 7 (-4) You said you were powergaming, right?

If you go elf you can use what is probably the second best two handed weapon (after the greatsword) which is the Elven Curve Blade (Finessable!).

The fact about armor is that the mitral full plate is still the best combined AC possible (9base, 1Dex, 2Dex for mitral). Considering that armor training increases this number and eventually lets you move at full speed in it, this is clearly the best choice if you can afford it. The second best armor is the Mitral Breast Plate and the third is the Mitral Chainshirt.

As for feats, Power Attack and Weapon Finesse are of paramount importance; get them as soon as possible. I would suggest getting them on level one and then pretty much take what you want. Weapon focus gives you an edge on melee and qualifies you for Weapon Specialization. I always recommend the Step up Chain and Furious Focus (I do! Look up my other posts!). You might want to branch to archery, since it represents a very low investment. Get a masterwork +2 str longbow, Pick Deadly aim and you are pretty much set. Improved critical is a must as soon as you have the necessary BAB. At later levels you can go for Rapid Shot, but remember that you also need Point Blank shot, so consider getting all of your two-handed weapon fighting feats first.

If you want to multiclass, two barbarian levels give you rage (+3 DMG), +10 movement (good if you plant to take the Vital Strike chain) and let you take the Rage Power Reckless abandon. It is SICK, you will never miss an attack ever again.

The disclaimer for this is, of course: "Bear in mind that this build, even though it is somewhat effective, is strictly inferior to a STR base fighter."

 

[Mr.E_Danger]

I have always thought a fighter's main strength lies in the fact that he gets more feats than any other class. There are some exotic weapons that offer some great abilities. It is rather easy to pump up a fighter that uses a two handed weapon or two weapons to fight. those seem to be a dime a dozen. Why don't you try something a bit different? A fighter with high dex and light armor that uses hammers instead, like the aklys, which have a reach of 20 feet and can trip at a range! add some feats to improve your trip, and you can disable enemies all over the battlefield. Throwing hammers and the rebounding hammer feat means you'll be like thor or captain america, bouncing hammers off your enemies faces right back into your hands.

The Magus may not deal the same amount of damage as a straight up fighter, but that's not his strength. His strength lies in magic AND physical attacks. dealing "sick" amounts of damage is great. The more damage you deal, the faster the enemies go down and that is always a good thing. however, having the ability to help your allies, to get out of sticky situations, or do something the enemy cannot predict is even better. the spells and utilities you'd have access to will more than make up for the damage you might miss out on as a straight up fighter.

 

[Systole]

Goblin also has a net +0 bonus to scores instead of a +2 like most. It's definitely a great race, but I don't think it's broken. Spellcasters are still much better served picking a race that boosts their casting stat, archers are better off being medium for the damage boost (from damage die increase -- more pronounced w/ gravity bow -- and not taking a str penalty), and...dex-based melee fighters aren't exactly the pinnacle of power in PF.

In any case, I wanted to do goblin for the novelty of being a small melee death machine. Str-based would've been the better build, I could've layered on enlarge person (reduce person, while boosting dex and attack bonus, = no reach, which = no flanking for you!, which = sad panda) and later on, Monstrous Physique for the six-armed (on top of any vestigial ones or tentacle discovery) Calikang for super melee damage output.

I realize that +4 to a stat on its face sounds unbalanced, but...seriously, what can you actually do with it that is so plainly superior to some other racial choice? It's not like it's +4 to a mental stat (Tiefling can pull that one off, albeit w/ a random roll).

By the "net stat bonus argument," a race that's +10/-2/-2/-2/-2/-2 is balanced, or possibly even inferior to a half-orc or a human. The effect of larger vs. smaller bonuses on gameplay is not linear.

The difference between +2 and +4, monetarily, is the difference between Belt of Dex (X) and Belt of Dex (X+2). Whatever level you're at, that's a fairly substantial difference. Is it infinite? No. But it's there, and it makes goblins a better choice than almost any other race for dex classes.

 

[Ramaster]

By the "net stat bonus argument," a race that's +10/-2/-2/-2/-2/-2 is balanced, or possibly even inferior to a half-orc or a human. The effect of larger vs. smaller bonuses on gameplay is not linear.

The difference between +2 and +4, monetarily, is the difference between Belt of Dex (X) and Belt of Dex (X+2). Whatever level you're at, that's a fairly substantial difference. Is it infinite? No. But it's there, and it makes goblins a better choice than almost any other race for dex classes.

Indeed.

Goblin Gunslingers shoot you in tha face for obscene DMG.

EDIT: They also got a feat on Advanced Race Guide that lets them use firearms on size category larger.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

By the "net stat bonus argument," a race that's +10/-2/-2/-2/-2/-2 is balanced, or possibly even inferior to a half-orc or a human. The effect of larger vs. smaller bonuses on gameplay is not linear.

That's a much more drastic difference and is basically hyperbole.

The difference between +2 and +4, monetarily, is the difference between Belt of Dex (X) and Belt of Dex (X+2). Whatever level you're at, that's a fairly substantial difference.

And how much is human's "free bonus feat" worth? Since most feats just plain aren't available as items, I'd say the only true answer to that is "priceless."
Judging things by market price is kind of silly anyway. Int +2 item costs a wizard the same as str +2 item costs the fighter (or half, if the wizard just makes it himself). Which one would you say is more valuable for the respective buyer? Are they both getting an equal amount out of their purchase?

Is it infinite? No. But it's there, and it makes goblins a better choice than almost any other race for dex classes.

Which dex classes? As I said, archers optimally won't touch goblin, it hurts the damage too badly. Beyond them, are there good dex-based classes in PF? Does goblin make them broken? Melee Alchemist is decent for dex...I already broke down how they're still better off being str-based. Dawnflower Dervish is great as a dex class. ...Goblin takes a charisma penalty. Whoops, there goes that plan. Magus? I guess they wouldn't be awful, but why not be a ratfolk or tiefling instead for int boost?
I guess what I'm asking is...what class is goblin actually breaking? Again...+4 int, that's broken. +4 cha, ditto. +4 to a physical stat...really doesn't bother me that much, expecially when other "lesser" races still have competitive benefits despite the higher stat bonus.

 

[Systole]

That's a much more drastic difference and is basically hyperbole.

[...]

I guess what I'm asking is...what class is goblin actually breaking? Again...+4 int, that's broken. +4 cha, ditto. +4 to a physical stat...really doesn't bother me that much, expecially when other "lesser" races still have competitive benefits despite the higher stat bonus.

The example was to illustrate a point. Namely, "adds up to zero" doesn't work as a metric when stat bonuses become more extreme. My example established that "adds up to zero" is way off +10; therefore, stat bonuses don't scale linearly. And if stat bonuses don't scale linearly, then saying f(+4) + f(-2) + f(-2) < f(+2) is not necessarily correct.

As far as being broken goes, my take on it is this: there is a general path (dex-based melee, especially with stealth) where goblin's +4 Dex outstrips the other choices. So players who want to go this path are essentially punished for choosing something besides goblin, which means that optimization takes clear precedence over RP. I think that is poor design. Even if Paizo is using the strengths of a race to make up for the weaknesses of a class, it's still poor design. However, we don't seem to agree of the value of that +4 versus a +2, so I doubt we're not going to reach consensus on broken-ness.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

But PF is littered with punishments for choosing inferior options. The human sorcerer favored class thing is WAAAY worse than this. Ditto for Half-Elf Summoner's FC option.

And seriously, what class? Even in my case, wanting to be a small, dextrous melee alchemist... if I had known when making the character I'd have a friend joining ammenable to being a ratfolk...I would've totally gone ratfolk instead. 2 less dex, but 2 more int and no cha penalty (UMD is sexy), bonuses to perception (best skill in the game) and UMD (see above), and swarming! Oh my god is swarming awesome if you have someone to use it with!

You seem to be opposed to the general principal of +4 to a stat. In general, I agree. But there are definitely cases where it really isn't broken at all. In 3E, you could be a Water Orc for +4 str, +2 con, -2 int/wis/cha, for a net -2 in a system where most races were net +0, so...about the same deal. You could even go Dragonborn template to get rid of the light sensitivity and penalties against fire attacks. But you have a guy in the end w/ lots of str and con. So all he's good for is being a big stupid fighter. So even though it looks and sounds broken as all hell... it's still much weaker than a spellcaster playing a race w/ penalty to their casting stat.
The big picture matters. A lot.

 

[Poetman75]

I've been a TWW for a bit and love it. Add Spring Attack and you don't even need a ranged weapon. Add Critical Focus and Improved Critical. Basically huge crits. Add 2 Crit Bonus Feats and Critical Mastery. You can even drop the Improved Crit Feat and wait for Level 20 with Weapon Mastery. Even at Level 6, I could stand my ground with most enemies.

 

[Ramaster]

Over 10 years! That's some might thread necromancy right there.